How do you throw a RISEBALL?

[pobguy]

So what does this statement intend to communicate? I don't think anyone here is suggesting that a ball will instantaneously right-angle move (notch-move). I believe, just like everyone else here does, that a ball moving through air that is not hit by a bat (for example) will have a smooth path. I do not believe this is an issue in debate. The issue in debate is "late break" and its existence potentially due to Reynolds and its relationship to Magnus.



From this especially you should know that this is a statistically insignificant sample. Unless the laws of statistics has changed since my post-graduate education a sample size needs to at least be 30 or greater. Then in my pragmatic experience in life, and relating this again to the riseball in softball pitchers, I have and very well could catch 12 different pitchers and never see a pitcher with "late-break".



Let's break this down in a comparative analysis between what you are saying and what MIT folks have said. You are saying Reyonolds can not have an effect over a baseball pitched across over 60 feet. But the MIT folks say that Reynolds is in play over a 66 foot cricket pitch. Are you suggesting that this less than six feet delta is the critical difference? But before you answer that you might want to remember that a cricket ball is heavier and much smoother than a baseball which then those facts really place your contention in doubt.




I want to suggest again here, that you, then we, are getting very confused on your consistent use of the word "smooth". AGAIN a "smooth" path is NOT the question in debate,..... LATE BREAK is.

I don't have time right now to answer all your questions in detail. You are certainly correct that I use the word "smooth" without really defining what I mean by that, since I am trying to avoid technical language. Virtually every pitched ball trajectory I have analyzed can be described by constant acceleration in each of the three dimensions. That type of model can be improved upon slightly by allowing the accelerations to be dependent on the square of the velocity. That is what I mean by smooth. Regarding "late break", I have no opinion about that, since that term has different meaning for different people. The trajectories that people have been posting here (taken from data I have provided, by the way) all are smooth according to the definition I gave you. Whether some of you think they show late break or not is not important to me. They are what they are, regardless of what you call them.

I have not seen the MIT data. If you can provide a link to it, I will take a look. However, you made the important observation that a cricket ball is smoother than a baseball. That actually makes a big difference in the drag crisis, which is a very sharp transition for a smooth ball but not for a baseball, the latter based on real measurements. I am not sure I have seen data for a softball, but I would guess it would look more like a baseball than a smooth ball. So, while I agree that the effect you are talking about can occur in principle, I am very doubtful that it can occur for a pitched baseball or softball. And in any case, such an effect is not consistent with lots of data.

I don't understand your argument about statistics and sample size. As I have said, I have looked at many thousands of MLB pitches from many different pitchers. Are you in effect saying that the "late break" is so infrequent that one needs to look at huge numbers of pitches to find one?

 

[pobguy]

One more thing about the "drag crisis". For those of you who have Adair's The Physics of Baseball, 3rd ed, take a look at the figure on page 8, which shows the dependence of "drag coefficient" on velocity (which is related to Reynold's Number) for a smooth ball, a rough ball, and a baseball. The character of the "drag crisis", where the drag coefficient decreases, is very different for these different balls. In particular, it is very sharp for the smooth ball and quite gradual for a baseball. Given that a baseball loses about 8 mph over 55 ft, you can see from the figure that nothing very sudden happens with a change of speed that small. So, once again, I argue that the drag crisis effect may be important "in principle" but it seems to be totally unimportant for a baseball (and, I suspect, for a softball).

 

[obbay]

Unless the laws of statistics has changed since my post-graduate education a sample size needs to at least be 30 or greater. Then in my pragmatic experience in life, and relating this again to the riseball in softball pitchers, I have and very well could catch 12 different pitchers and never see a pitcher with "late-break".

the issue is not the pitcher but the pitch.

I have data for 15 complete games (all but one of the tournament), amounting to about 1500 pitches from about a dozen different pitchers (some throwing more pitches than others).

I think it is safe to presume that most of these pitchers could and did throw a riseball during the 15 games. The actual data recording each pitch did not document a late, gravity-defying upward break. You and Michelle Smith can say whatever you want, but I haven't seen any tangible evidence to the contrary. If anything, all evidence I've seen supports FFS position. I've read in many different publications and seen presentations which demonstrated the brain's ability to interpolate information to create a perception that appears real, but in fact is not.

 

[GunnerShotgun]

Unless the laws of statistics has changed since my post-graduate education a sample size needs to at least be 30 or greater.

I think you need to crack that stats book open again.

 

[lhowser]

Hey Ihouser,

I have uploaded a video about how I throw my rise ball.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bLveQb4jSA&feature=youtu.be
A couple of things I didn't state in the clip.
The thumb needs to point behind the ball after release. If it points forward the ball will tunnel. (bullet spin)
I don't lean backwards to throw th pitch upwards I just adjust the release point slightly later.
An aggressive snap is required to keep the spin rate up.

Hope it helps.

Thank you for the video. I will definitely consider those ideas as we try to put the pitch together for by daughter.

 

[RubberBiscuit]

I don't understand your argument about statistics and sample size.

This is a bit alarming. I learned this in a graduate statistical analysis courses and then also use this principle throughout my long engineering career. I deal with this principle with co-workers and venders and customers alike (fairly standard stats stuff). I would suggest you might want to look into it. It is CRITICAL in making assumptions based on a data set.

Now a person COULD assume that you have a valid data set based on the number of overall pitches. I would disagree. In an extreme example one could analyze the flight off a single pitching machine up to a pitch count of a million. Would this mean you can make exacting conclusions on the flight of a softball?!?!? Absolutely not. I hope you can see this problem. You need to have pitches from a varying selection of pitchers that needs to be greater than or equal to 30 pitchers to have statistical significance to allow confidence in your data assumptions.

Are you in effect saying that the "late break" is so infrequent that one needs to look at huge numbers of pitches to find one?

A MINIMAL number of pitchers should be 30. (and this data set of pitchers should be hand selected accomplished pitchers that have at least some indication from input from catchers/coaches/etc that "wow,...this pitcher has that late-break characteristic".) I submit that it IS that rare and it is directly attestable to an exacting speed/spin/angle on the pitch. I would be willing to bet large sums that there is a dynamic, like drag crisis, this IS occurring on some pitchers pitches.

 

[RubberBiscuit]

I think you need to crack that stats book open again.

Actually - somebody needs to crack one open for the first time

 

[GunnerShotgun]

This is a bit alarming. I learned this in a graduate statistical analysis courses and then also use this principle throughout my long engineering career. I deal with this principle with co-workers and venders and customers alike (fairly standard stats stuff). I would suggest you might want to look into it. It is CRITICAL in making assumptions based on a data set.

I find it alarming that you think a man of his resume doesn't understand basic stats. I don't want to speak for him but I believe he meant he didn't understand your position on sample size, not that he didn't understand sample size in general.

I tend to agree with him. I don't think it means what you you think it means.

 

[bucket pinata]

Religion, Politics, Riseball.LOL

 

[pobguy]

This is a bit alarming. I learned this in a graduate statistical analysis courses and then also use this principle throughout my long engineering career. I deal with this principle with co-workers and venders and customers alike (fairly standard stats stuff). I would suggest you might want to look into it. It is CRITICAL in making assumptions based on a data set.

Now a person COULD assume that you have a valid data set based on the number of overall pitches. I would disagree. In an extreme example one could analyze the flight off a single pitching machine up to a pitch count of a million. Would this mean you can make exacting conclusions on the flight of a softball?!?!? Absolutely not. I hope you can see this problem. You need to have pitches from a varying selection of pitchers that needs to be greater than or equal to 30 pitchers to have statistical significance to allow confidence in your data assumptions.



A MINIMAL number of pitchers should be 30. (and this data set of pitchers should be hand selected accomplished pitchers that have at least some indication from input from catchers/coaches/etc that "wow,...this pitcher has that late-break characteristic".) I submit that it IS that rare and it is directly attestable to an exacting speed/spin/angle on the pitch. I would be willing to bet large sums that there is a dynamic, like drag crisis, this IS occurring on some pitchers pitches.

You question the validity and the statistical significance of the data that I have been using in support of my arguments. Yet at least I have data to support my arguments. If you want to fight bad science, as you claim, then please show us the data that support your arguments. Only then can we have a sensible discussion.

Regarding your Reynold's argument, I do not believe it plays any significant role in fastpitch softball pitching. I presented my argument in my last post, based on the known (i.e. measured) dependence of baseball/softball drag coefficient on speed (or Reynold's number). Give me your argument why it does play a role, supported by whatever data or theoretical argument you have (and please give references, as I have with the Adair book). It is not enough to quote some MIT study using cricket balls unless you can provide a reference for that work. Moreover, I have given you a reason why that work might not be relevant to fastpitch softball, based on differences in surface smoothness of softballs vs. cricket balls. Do you have a counterargument for me on that point?

We have made some progress in that you agree that the phenomenon of "late break" is rare. OK, if it truly is rare, then perhaps one would need more data in order to find it. Are you familiar with any of the NCAA pitchers from the 2011 WCWS? Do you know if any of them display "late break characteristics"? If so, let me know and I'll look at the data from that pitcher.